[Solar-talk] Method-Based Actions

[Travis Swicegood]

Sorry for the double-reply, but something else came to me as soon as I 
hit send.


Paul M Jones wrote:
>> Including both might be, but I would still allow the flex point.  The
>> other option here is to hard code it, which completely locks someone
>> into the exampleAction() naming convention.  I'm working on an OS
>> framework that uses the actionExample().  Not having the ability to
>> write my own mapper to support both method names during the transition
>> is one more factor I have to take into account if I were to port an
>> application to the Solar framework.
>>     
>
> I can't speak to porting applications in or out of Solar; again, I  
> really like the idea of all Solar apps looking more or less  
> identical; I think a common vocabulary and set of expectations goes a  
> long way to ease of learning and ease of use.
>   

One other point that hasn't been brought up here is testability.  It's 
easier to test ActionMapper to insure it's doing the proper mapping than 
it is to test the code within the controller/dispatcher itself, 
regardless of whether you can configure which type of ActionMapper the 
controller grabs.

-Travis